Tories announce new tax?

(Fri 2-Nov-2018)

The Conservative Party have the mistaken belief that I’m a supporter, and every so often illegally email me (I never opted in to get these emails from them), trying to get me to join, or buy a tea towel. I tried replying to the latest, but their email server rejected it.

Here’s their latest, marked as coming from Philip Hammond, with some comments from me.

On Monday I delivered this year’s Budget, and I want to let you know what this means.
Austerity is coming to an end.

Oh good. An end to the cuts, public service salary freezes?

That means more money for the NHS – and a tax cut for 32 million people. Back these policies? Then join the party delivering them.

The “more money for the NHS” is the same money that was announced back in June, when the government announced an “extra” £20 billion by 2024 – having introduced £22 billion in cuts. FullFact covered this back when it was announced in June, when they noted “Health experts have said this money will “help stem further decline in the health service, but it’s simply not enough to address the fundamental challenges facing the NHS, or fund essential improvements to services that are flagging.”” ( and “In 2013, NHS England said it faced a funding gap of £30 billion by the end of the decade, even if government spending kept up in line with inflation. So it needed that much more to deliver care to a growing and ageing population, assuming it made no savings itself.” (PDF)

Together, as a country, we’ve had to take some tough decisions. To sort out the mess left by Labour.

And that’s taken nine years? And “left by Labour”, rather than banks, who you have continued to fail to regulate?

But because of our balanced approach, the economy is growing and debt is falling.
So we can spend more on the public services we all use every day.

“Can” spend more, not “will”.

Like the biggest cash boost in the history of the NHS. We’ll be committing an extra £20.5 billion every year by 2023-24. Making sure the NHS is there for us when we need it.
And increasing the National Living Wage. Giving a £690 annual pay rise to some of the lowest paid.
We’re able to increase our spending – while giving a tax cut to 32 million people. So if you back these policies, then why not join the party delivering them?

The very lowest paid – those only getting part-time work, unreliable hours on the minimum wage – don’t benefit from this, but those earning over £50,000 a year (nearly twice the median average of £27,531) benefit more.

We’re raising the personal allowance next year. That means a tax cut of £1,205 for a typical basic rate taxpayer since 2010-11.
And we’re freezing fuel duty for the ninth year in a row. Saving the average car driver a total of £1,000 by 2020.

Again, a bigger gain for the wealthy with big cars, big engines, and who do lots of traveling than for those who can’t afford a car or only a small car. The fuel duty escalator was introduced to help encourage people to move away from burning more oil products, because of the impact on the environment and to prepare for increases in oil prices. The Conservatives have turned it off.

Don’t let Labour put it all at risk. Jeremy Corbyn wants to raise your taxes to the highest level in peacetime history. He’d undo all the hard work we’ve done together, as a country.

The highest band of income tax was around 90% in the 1950s and 60s, and reduced to 75% in 1971. Labour’s plan is to put the top rate back to 50% for earnings over £123,000 (the Conservatives reduced it from 50% to 45% in 2013), and for the rest of us promises:

95 per cent of taxpayers will be guaranteed no increase in their income tax contributions, and everyone will be protected from any increase in personal National Insurance contributions and VAT.

Some interesting things not mentioned, but in the Government’s Budget 2018: 24 things you need to know

The government is providing £500 million of additional funding for departments to prepare for Brexit for 2019-20. This is on top of the £1.5 billion already announced for that year.

Despite other government ministers and former ministers promising us Brexit would give us money.
And then there’s this:

A £28.8 billion National Roads Fund, paid for by road tax, includes £25.3 billion for the Strategic Road Network (motorways, trunk and A roads). The largest ever investment of this kind.

Given that road tax was abolished in 1937, announcing what is effectively a new tax in this was is somewhat burying the lede. There’s also no detail about how this will be set or collected.



Copper pans at Shugborough Hall

(Sun 18-Mar-2018)

Shugborough Hall, Staffordshire

In the kitchen, servants’ quarters, Shugborough Hall



LEGO caravan

(Sun 4-Mar-2018)

The children have been discovering the joy of LEGO, which means I have been re-discovering it, building together just before bedtime.

We’ve not got much – I gave all my childhood LEGO to my younger brother when I left home – and this is nowhere near as good as most of the stuff I see online, but I really liked this caravan I made:

Nowhere near the level of amazing I often see online, but I'm pretty pleased with this caravan I made with the children last night.

I’ve started our collection with sets from Sainsbury’s, which seems to often have some good value smaller sets on offer or in the clearance, but I think it’s time to go and spend too much money on ebay…



Photo: The Dudson Centre

(Sun 19-Nov-2017)

Dudson Centre, Stoke-on-Trent



A History of Parking Enforcement

(Thu 2-Nov-2017)

From the first traffic wardens in London, April 1960, through to decriminalisation in the 1990s and the various whims of government since.

This applies to England; most is very similar in the rest of the UK, but some important differences do apply.

The Start of Parking Enforcement.

Double yellow lines and parking meters were both first introduced in the UK during the 1950s. In September 1960, The first Traffic Wardens were introduced in London. They were employed by the police to enforce parking restrictions. Traffic Wardens were later for introduced across the rest of the country. Powers to enforce parking restrictions were held by the police: police officers could enforce them but most enforcement was done by the Traffic Wardens various police forces employed.

Rising Traffic

Traffic levels rose, but pressure on police budgets diverted funds away from parking enforcement to more serious crime. Since 1958, councils had powers to charge for parking on highways, but there was inadequate enforcement, so it was rarely used. When the regulations were enforced, they were enforced by Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs), which are an option to avoid being tried for a criminal offence – the process for challenging a ticket was to go to a magistrates’ court and be tried, risking a far bigger fine. Ignoring a ticket could lead to prison time (not directly, but via contempt of court for not paying a fine). Off street, councils could issue Excess Charge Notices (ECNs) on their car parks, which worked in much the same way.

The Road Traffic Act 1991

Something needed to be done. In 1991, it was. The Road Traffic Act 1991 created decriminalised parking enforcement, which allowed councils to apply for the power to enforce some of the restrictions themselves – and to encourage them to do so, allowed them to keep the money raised. This solved the problem of lack of enforcement. To deal with the problem of the process being unduly punitive in some circumstances, the councils who applied for decriminalised parking enforcement would not be issuing FPNs or ECNs, but a new type of ticket – the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). These do not go through the criminal process, but a new process under civil law, where penalties can be appealed against, first to the council, then to an independent adjudicator. Unpaid penalties are registered as debts and pursued by bailiffs. The new PCNs would be issued by Parking Attendants, who could be employed directly by councils, or by private companies working on behalf of councils.

After a slow start (the first councils to take on these powers were the London boroughs, who started enforcement in 1993 – 1994), councils, especially in London, took to this enthusiastically and in some cases too enthusiastically. Many contracted out the enforcement to private companies, with contracts that gave both the council and the private company incentive to issue as many tickets as possible. This incentive was then often passed on to the Parking Attendants, and allegations of corruption, unfair tickets, and a focus on revenue raising over service provision abounded.

This widespread perception of poor behaviour by local authorities and their parking attendants, combined with their reduced powers compared to the Police-employed traffic wardens exacerbated the poor reputation of parking enforcement as a whole. PCNs had to be placed on the windscreen, so attempts to prevent Parking Attendants serving a penalty they had issued, by violence, threats, or reckless driving became a problem.

Some restrictions, such as parking on pedestrian crossings, were not decriminalised, so could not be enforced by the Parking Attendants who may be issuing a penalty to the next car along, on a different restriction.

The Traffic Management Act 2004

The Traffic Management Act 2004 was introduced to address these problems. This replaced Decriminalised Parking Enforcement with Civil Parking Enforcement, and Parking Attendants with Civil Enforcement Officers (CEOs). The tickets themselves remained PCNs, but now, came at two different amounts for different contraventions – parking somewhere where parking is not allowed, such as yellow lines, can result a PCN for a higher amount than not following the rules somewhere parking is allowed, such as overstaying a time limit. Although passed in 2004, it didn’t (for these purposes) come into effect until 2008.

Bonus schemes for issuing PCNs were banned, a rules on how the revenue could be spent were changed. Clearer advice on the appeals process was published. Councils were given the power to issue PCNs by post if the CEO was prevented from serving it, or if it was captured by an “approved device” – a enforcement camera system. Separate regulations, brought into force in 2005, allowed councils to use these camera systems to enforce bus lanes with PCNs. Restrictions on when clamping can be used were tightened. Powers to enforce some additional restrictions, most significantly the pedestrian crossing zig-zags, were introduced.

Councils were encouraged to widen the scope of the Civil Enforcement Officer role, with powers for enforcing littering legislation or other highways related tasks, and increase the pay and training standards to increase professionalism and standards within parking enforcement.

About the same time, Councils in London, who had been able to use cameras before, gained powers to use cameras for more things, such as box junctions and banned turns. Cameras can be fixed in place, but are also often fitted to vehicles. Penalties issued by camera quickly became unpopular, partly because they were catching people who did not expect to be caught, or see any reason for the restriction, but also because being issued through the post instead of being spoken to by a person at the time left people feeling like the penalties were automatic (they are not; each one is issued by a person based on the camera footage collected, but that person is in an office and never seen by the driver), and where they would expect a warning from a police officer, were now expected to pay a penalty.

The Deregulation Act 2015

In 2014, the government announced it would “ban spy cars”, and under The Deregulation Act 2015, introduced new regulations restricting where CCTV could be used for parking enforcement, which restricted their use to bus lanes, bus stops, school entrance markings, and red routes, preventing them from being used for other restrictions such as pedestrian crossings. It also did not remove the powers London councils only had for enforcing some moving traffic offences. This had little practical impact for most authorities, as most cameras had been used primarily for for bus lanes and school restrictions, but some were left with relatively little for their expensive equipment to do. New regulations also provided a similarly mis-publicised ten-minute grace period. Then Communities Minister Eric Pickles, who introduced the bill and associated regulations, had previously made comments about allowing motorists to stop for fifteen minutes on double yellow lines to go to the shop, but the ten minutes grace period actually introduced applied only to overstaying time limits and paid for time such as expired pay and display tickets or meters.

The present (and future?)

Some anomalies remain in the enforcement regulations and processes. There a still a handful of parking restrictions (including causing an obstruction, parking where there is a solid white line in the centre of the road, and rules regarding night time parking and lights) which can only be dealt with by the police, but many police forces refer all parking problems to the local authority. Areas with two tiers of local government (a county council and a borough or district council) have responsibility for on-street parking with the county and off-street car parks with the borough, making consistency more difficult to achieve. Pavement parking is a difficult problem, and is one of the remaining differences between London (where there is a clear, specific ban that councils can enforce) and the rest of England (where it is only banned in specific places, by other restrictions, or for vehicles over 7.5 tonnes)



« Older